On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 01:28:37AM +0300, menucha wrote:
> See Sha"ch YD 189, 13 "kol ma shebeit din lemata osim, beit din lemaala
> maskimim imahem" as an explanation for physical phenomena which are
> affected by the kvia of the calendar.
Another reminder: Regardless of RET's question about delivery date,
we hold this, or at least are chosheshim for it, lehalakhah -- veset
hachodesh. There is even a machloqes about whether a veset hachodesh of
the 30th carries through to the 1st after a 29-day month.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

<< See Sha"ch YD 189, 13 "kol ma shebeit din lemata osim, beit din lemaala
maskimim imahem" as an explanation for physical phenomena which are
affected by the kvia of the calendar.
menucha >>
Thanks for the reference. However, this still doesnt really explain this in
terms of our experience and modern science.
As I hinted before, it raises questions about nonJews, converts etc,
In some cases one can simply say that like all shiurim Chazal made a rule
and one has to decide something arbitrarily. However, in other cases it
seems that poskim took it literally
--
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120626/9af3fa62/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Eli Turkel asked:
> In a recent daf yomi (Nidah 38a) Rav Yehuda claims that birth
> occurs after rosh chodesh of the 9th month. ...
>
> ... ie how does bet din declaring Rosh Chodesh affect the woman ...
I suppose it is similar to how declaring a second Adar can retroactively
change someone from being older than Bar Mitzvah to younger than Bar
Mitzvah. Or the more classic case of a girl who was raped at just over 3
years old, the extra Adar can cause her to be not-yet-three so that her
besulim grow back.
MY question is not on *how* the Beis Din's declaration can affect biology,
but where Rav Yehudah got his information that it does so. Statistical
analysis seems unlikely, unless he either obtained information on when
other couples had relations, or had so many children himself that his own
practices gave him enough information. But the alternative is that he got
this information by Revelation, which (to me) doesn't sound too likely
either.
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4fe9b0b64634430b65120st51vuc

>> Google says a lot of people believe that if they are close to term,
women
are more likely to go into labor when there is a /full/ moon. However
Google
also says that scientific studies fail to prove this. I believe that the
same number of children are born every day of the year, the only
significant
uptick being nine months after a major power failure. << [--TK]
>>>>>
Someone sent me an article off list (sorry don't have a link) re a study
done in J-m hospital -- it showed that more babies were born in the 24 hours
after Yom Kippur than would be expected randomly. These were full term
babies, the study did not show that fasting brought on premature delivery.
The suggestion is that mild dehydration may bring on labor, so presumably
the same would be true after Tisha B'Av. Even though the study was
inconclusive on this point, the article suggested that a pregnant woman with a
history of premature deliveries might want to ask a shaila about fasting on Y'K
(I guess just having some water).
--Toby Katz
=============
Romney -- good values, good family, good hair
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120626/00c198e7/attachment-0001.htm>

>> See tosfot sotah 34b D"H avotai as well as michtav meliyahu -yamim
noraim where he posits those of high ruchanit stature know nothing of this
world once they leave it. <<
KT
Joel ich
>>>>
How does that square with "kol beramah nishma, Rochel mevaka al baneha"?
>>
In addition to the question of Rbn Katz there are numerous medrashim about
the avot praying for the Jewish people
--
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120626/60dda622/attachment-0001.htm>

: From: "Rich, Joel" <JR...@sibson.com>
<<<>>>RJR: How does that square with "kol beramah nishma, Rochel mevaka al
baneha"?
:From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
<<<>>>RMB: Perhaps Yirmiyahu asking her to daven bridged the gap, and the
gemara and Tosafos are talking about when you don't have nevi'im who can
converse on both planes of reality bridging the gap.
:From: Eliyahu Grossman
Or perhaps Yirmuyahu, who was reporting on a prophetic dream that he had,
where he saw and heard G-d telling him of the Jewish redemption, and using
the name of the matriarch who was beloved and when dead, was cast by the
side of the road (the message to the Jewish people) is a perfect
metaphorical fit. Perhaps these are images that he dreamt that provided the
idea of redemption, and should not be taken anthropomorphically any more
than believing that the body of the Creator appeared to the prophet - it was
only one of many symbols. Just as the name of Ephriam, who is spoken of
next, clearly seems to be the term relating to the segment of the Northern
Israeli population that went into exile first, which was called "Ephriam"
(by assorted prophets), Ephriam who was cast away, and not the singular son
of Yosef. In keeping with that style, titles are being given a voice, but
the voice is not the thing itself.
Yirmiyahu also uses a similar style in the beginning of Eicha, where the
city is a woman, crying, and inconsolable. But the image of a woman as
applied to a city, which is being given a voice, and should not be taken
literally, but was a representation of the message.
If we cannot have a conversation with the dead who reside in some
unreachable place, what about the dead conversing with the Creator, whose
"place" is even "higher"? After all, that seems to be the basis for people
who are inclined to go to grave and pray - that there is some special
connection between the dead and the Creator. Does this connection even exist
for the dead? Tehillim 6:6, which we say during Tachanun (several times a
week, so it should be known) seems to indicate that King David believed that
the dead could not speak to G-d at all. (See Rashi there who quotes
Yeshiyahu 38:18 "For sheol (the dark "place" of the dead) shall not thank
You, nor will death praise you.").
All the best,
Eliyahu Grossman

"No, you're the one imposing some unspecified other criterion, without
providing a basis. Just look at the term; doesn't it speak for itself?"
No, it obviously does not speak for itself as the various and differing
opinion of those commenting shows. TU means, AIUI, one who makes torah his
occupation, TCh means, well, that's the question isn't it. Talmid means
student, chacham means wise one. So, does it mean the student of a wise
one? Or does it mean a scholar? Or does it mean one who makes torah his
occupation? Or does it mean someone who learns all day, or half the day, or
a set time each day etc. etc. etc. (to quote the King of Siam via R&H)?
The fact that you're unable to give a source to your assertion indicates to
me that it is, indeed, merely your sevarah, no better or worse than the
sevarahs of the other list members who disagree and have a different
interpretation.
Joseph
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120626/71f10fff/attachment-0001.htm>

On 26/06/2012 7:23 AM, Eliyahu Grossman wrote:
> Tehillim 6:6, which we say during Tachanun (several times a
> week, so it should be known) seems to indicate that King David believed that
> the dead could not speak to G-d at all. (See Rashi there who quotes
> Yeshiyahu 38:18 "For sheol (the dark "place" of the dead) shall not thank
> You, nor will death praise you.").
There is no Rashi on that pasuk at all.
And how can you suggest that David Hamelech did not believe in hisha'arut
hanefesh, ch"v?
--
Zev Sero "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
are expanding through human ingenuity."
- Julian Simon

On 25/06/2012 3:11 PM, Ben Waxman wrote:
>
>> Plus since I don't buy for second your argument that anyone learning full
time counts as a TC, the >>distinction really isn't there.
And RZS replied:
>What other criterion could there be?
How about the Rema's definition in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 243
namely:
???: ???? ????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?? ??, ? ?? ???? ????? ??"? ????? ?????
???? ????? ?????, ????? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ?????? ???????,
?????? ??????? ???? ??????. (?"? ???? ??"?). ?] ???"? (?) ???? ??????? ?????
??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ??????, ?"? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ???
???, ?? ???? ????? ??"?, ??? ??????. (?? ???? ??"?). ??"? ?? ?????? ?????
????? ?"? ???, ??? ?????? ????? (?) ??? ????? (?? ??"?).
This being after the Shulchan Aruch there, in defining who is patur from
taxes writes:
?] ????? ?????? ????? ?????? ???????, ??? ??? ????? ???????, ??????. ?]
????? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??????, ?? ??? ? ??? ???? ??????? ?? ? ??? ???? ???
??????, ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?"? ????? ????, ???? ????? ??????.
Now the Rema's source for the idea that he has to be muchzak to be a talmid
chacham in his generation, who knows the give and take of the Torah, and
understands the majority of places of the Talmud, and their explanations and
the rulings of the geonim as well as the Torah being his business is the
Trumas HaDeshen in Siman 342 - which is a fascinating read of itself, and I
recommend it to everybody. Note that the Trumas HaDeshen toys with the
common idea that the only person who is Talmud Chacham who should be exempt
from taxes is a rosh yeshiva, and suggests that indeed the idea of the
common people has some merit, although he would include in the category also
those who fulfil the criteria which the Rema then spells out ie:
????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ????? ????? /????/ ???? ????? ??????? ???? ????, ???
?? ?"? ????? ????? ???? ????? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ??????
???????? ?????? ???????, ?? ????? ?????? ????' ?????? ???? ????? ?? ????
???? ???? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???????.
> Is one person's learning of a
>shverer ketzos more valuable than another person's learning of chumash,
>if that's what he's up to? By what standard?
Regarding the halachos of teh appropriate treatment of talmudei chachamim -
it is of course a mitzvah to stand up before a talmud chacham (Yoreh Deah
siman 244 si'if 1), and there are potentially issues about standing in front
of them in line at the bank etc. Presumably RZS stands up every time
somebody who is a full time learner gets on a bus or train that he is
sitting on and offers them his seat and also offers to let them go in front
of him in a line at the bank or to renew a passport or at the grocery store
etc (and, since eshes chaver, k'chaver, that would seem apply to the wife of
such talmud chacham as well). I am not quite sure how he manages to get
things done in the frummer parts of town (because while a talmid chacham can
be mochel his kavod, somebody else cannot just be mochel his kavod for him,
and it gets even tricker with the wife, because, as most assume, the kavod
is actually that of the Talmud chacham, she cannot be mochel it for him, and
he needs to be found to be mochel it).
--
Zev Sero "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
Regards
Chana

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 06:10:34PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote:
: On today's daf, Y-mi Yevamos 2:4 (vilna 24a-b), it learns from the time
: delay required between petirah and yibum a list of things, among them
: "sheha'ishah yolefes lachadashim mequta'im" -- it doesn't have to be a
: whole (integer) number of months...
That's 4:2, lysdexia strikes again!
Actually, now that I'm on 4:11 27a, I see it's nisht azoi pashut...
The 3 months wait before a baby shows is me'eis la'eis.
But the 7 or 9 months until birth is subject to machloqes: either me'eis
la'eis or we count calendar months. Not that it is necessarily on the
same day of the month as conception, but part or rov of Adar will be
month 1 of the 9, and then part or rov of Tishrei would make month
#9. (I haven't gotten to the point of knowing if there is a masqanah as
to whether it needs rov of a calendar month to count.)
In any case, even chadashim mequta'im could mean a tie to the calendar.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space.
mi...@aishdas.org In that space is our power to choose our
http://www.aishdas.org response. In our response lies our growth
Fax: (270) 514-1507 and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM)

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 02:23:53PM +0300, Eliyahu Grossman wrote:
:> RMB: Perhaps Yirmiyahu asking her to daven bridged the gap, and the
:> gemara and Tosafos are talking about when you don't have nevi'im who can
:> converse on both planes of reality bridging the gap.
:
: Or perhaps Yirmuyahu, who was reporting on a prophetic dream that he had,
: where he saw and heard G-d telling him of the Jewish redemption, and using
: the name of the matriarch who was beloved and when dead...
The question is whether the mashal of a nevu'ah can be theologically
impossible. Who is the Man in the Throne in par' Mishpatim? According to
R' Saadia Gaon's or the Rambam's mehalekh, where they can't say the Man
is an image representing HQBH, would allow for a nevu'ah to be expressed
as Rachel doing something impossible for her to do.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger If you won't be better tomorrow
mi...@aishdas.org than you were today,
http://www.aishdas.org then what need do you have for tomorrow?
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 03:23:10PM +0100, Chana Luntz wrote:
: On 25/06/2012 3:11 PM, Ben Waxman wrote:
:> Plus since I don't buy for second your argument that anyone learning full
:> time counts as a TC, the distinction really isn't there.
: And RZS replied:
:> What other criterion could there be?
: How about the Rema's definition in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 243
: namely:
BTW, people can see this post, with Hebrew, at
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.jewish.avodah/28230
(GMane.org is used to turn Avodah into a RSS feed for people who want
to read it in a blog reader. This threaded archive is just a handy
side-benefit.)
I find it interesting that WRT to kibud, it depends what he knows
(shaqla vetarya, mar'eh meqomos be'al peh in chumash, shas and ge'onim),
not time or even effort. This makes a distinction between the measure of
the mitzvah, which AIUI is ameilus, and how we measure kibud-worthiness.
Someone with an edietic memory gets more kibud for less work.
I also find it interesting that it is WRT taxes, a financial issue,
that the Rama focuses on torasam umenasan -- those whose "job" is Torah,
a different criterion.
But nidon didan is neither, it's the draft.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger People were created to be loved.
mi...@aishdas.org Things were created to be used.
http://www.aishdas.org The reason why the world is in chaos is that
Fax: (270) 514-1507 things are being loved, people are being used.

R' Gershon Dubin wrote:
> Clearly the Mechaber in 177:2 says that it does in fact depend
> on the eating style prevalent at that time and place. Since
> "we" never stop eating pas (the style you refer to) it's always
> lelafes. ame would work in the other direction; in the USA in
> 2012 nobody (who doesn't have a berachos cheshbon) would ever
> eat bread with their dessert. So the dessert is NOT lelafes and
> requires a beracha.
I agree, but you're not going far enough. It's not just dessert. No one
today would ever eat bread with their string beans, or with their
spaghetti, or with corn on the cob.
I'll often put cole slaw on some bread, and lettuce and tomato are often
sandwich enhancers, but would someone have bread (other than croutons) with
their salad? Clearly, the salad is the ikar, and the croutons are the
enhancers, to a modern American.
I'll often dip some bread in my meat ball sauce, or in chicken gravy, and
they are certainly enhancing the bread. But make no mistake -- I'm talking
about the sauce, not the meat. I very well might put a meat ball in my
bread, but the other modern Americans at the table would think it childish.
Summary: I really don't understand why "in the USA in 2012", the hamotzi on
my hot dog roll -- which I'm using only to keep my hand clean and hold the
condiments -- covers the hot dog itself.
I would like to offer a conjecture to the chevra. I recall looking into an
idea once, but I cannot find my notes. I think there are two distinct
reasons for why hamotzi covers other food, and one is so famous that we
might tend to forget the other. Specifically: Suppose I sit down to drink a
glass of wine followed by a glass of orange juice. I say Hagafen on the
wine, drink it, and then I drink the orange juice without saying any
additional bracha. Why? As I recall, it is because of the chashivus of the
wine. The orange juice is not enhancing the wine in any way, but it is
tafel to the wine simply based on chashivus alone, if I remember correctly.
Could it be that Hamotzi works similarly? Could it be that the chashivus of
the bread causes Hamotzi to cover everything which is part of the meal,
even the hot dog which is being enhanced BY the bread, rather than the
other way around. This logic would exclude only the dessert which is not
part of the meal, unless the dessert is actually eaten together with bread
(as was done in the posts which began this thread) which visibly
demonstrates the chashivus of the bread.
This logic even works for the odd case where dessert is eaten at the
*beginning* of the meal and therefore requires a separate bracha -- such as
fruit on Rosh Hashana night, or maror at the Seder.
Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it.
http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:38pm GMT, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: Summary: I really don't understand why "in the USA in 2012", the
: hamotzi on my hot dog roll -- which I'm using only to keep my hand clean
: and hold the condiments -- covers the hot dog itself.
That is pretty much the same question as Cantor Wolberg asked at the
top of this thread.
If I may paraphrase my initial answer: Berakhos are a bunch of rules
made by a Sanhedrin in order to make our "thank You for this food" as
specific and thus meaningful as possible. It therefore feels what CRW
called "artificial" because it is indeed artifice.
The didn't plan on cultural shift. For that matter, had we stayed in
the Middle East, they wouldn't have had to until the 20th century and
partial Arab assimilation of Western norms. They also didn't plan on the
end of the institution, so that a subsequent Sanhedrin isn't around to
fix the gap between eating style and hilkhos berskhos that opened up.
Ironically, it ends up making our "thank You" less precisely about
what we are thanking Him for. But since we are still blessing G-d for
what we ate (whatever that means -- "thanks" is only one possibility),
I don't think it calls for special measures to fix.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
Off-topic PS: Can anyone tell REMT and RAM how to set the timezone in
Juno? Both send their emails with a GMT timestamp, and if the thread is
fast-moving, it makes it hard to visualize their place in the sequence.
--
Micha Berger Good decisions come from experience;
mi...@aishdas.org Experience comes from bad decisions.
http://www.aishdas.org - Djoha, from a Sepharadi fable
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Jun 23, 2012, at 9:08 PM, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
> In Avodah Digest 30:69, in the thread "Translation of Yayyin", R' Zev
> Sero wrote his understanding and translation of the phrase "v'nohagim
> she-shofchim l'eebood hamakos v'ein shosin osam".
> ...
> Over Shabbos, I spent some time looking through my Hagada collection, trying to find this "common idiom".
>
> I looked in quite a few Hebrew hagados, searching for the quoted
> phrase, or even any form of alef-beis-dalet in connection with the
> makkos, and never found it. Not in my hagados, and also not in the
> main nosei keilim on the last page of Siman 473 of both Shulchan Aruch
> and Mishne Brurah.
When I first posted this quote from the Kol Dodi, my intention was to make
the following point: regardless of who is right in RMB and RZS's discussion
of the origin of the idea that we spill for the makkos to show that our joy
is incomplete, it is in fact a well accepted notion in contemporary frum
circles, and not just fringes with "lefty" ideas. My point was, RZS's
contention that this is an idea alien to Torah is not correct, regardless
of the source, as proven by the number of widely respected talmedei
chachamim cite it.
As far as what RDF holds, I noted that my Hebrew wasn't good enough to
exclude any ambiguity on this point, dragging RZL into the discussion.
This can simply be solved by someone asking RDF directly; I am sure there
are multiple people on list who know him.
What I would be more curious of, assuming you (RAM) having been looking
through an (extensive?) Hagada collection is the answer to the original
question: how many hagaddos (and which ones) mention spilling for the
plagues because of decreased joy?
--
Daniel M. Israel
d...@cornell.edu

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:28:18AM -0600, Daniel M. Israel wrote:
: When I first posted this quote from the Kol Dodi, my intention was to : make the following point: regardless of who is right in RMB and RZS's
: discussion of the origin of the idea that we spill for the makkos to
: show that our joy is incomplete, it is in fact a well accepted notion
: in contemporary frum circles, and not just fringes with "lefty" ideas.
RZL wrote such a letter, I'm sure he'll share the answer.
: What I would be more curious of, assuming you (RAM) having been looking
: through an (extensive?) Hagada collection is the answer to the original
: question: how many hagaddos (and which ones) mention spilling for the
: plagues because of decreased joy?
In previous iterations, we also mentioned the hagaddah of R' SZ Aurbach['s
talmidim] and it appears as a "yeish lomar" in that of R Elyashiv (pg 106,
"dam va'eish").
A third question: We only have one other, and better sourced, proposal:
"Etzba Elokim hi". But Yekkes don't use an etzba, and even East Europeans
allow istenisim to spill from the cup. What's the to'eles?
: My point was, RZS's contention that this is an idea alien to Torah is
: not correct, regardless of the source, as proven by the number of
: widely: respected talmedei chachamim cite it.
I made the same argument by pointing out that if such compassion were
unJewish, so would giving the parallel explanation for Chatzi Hallel on
the last day of Pesach. And yet /that/ has a solid pedigree.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Brains to the lazy
mi...@aishdas.org are like a torch to the blind --
http://www.aishdas.org a useless burden.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Bechinas HaOlam

RZS writes:
>What other criterion could there be? Is one person's learning of a
>shverer ketzos more valuable than another person's learning of chumash,
>if that's what he's up to? By what standard?
Just an addendum to my post of yesterday, I would just point out, on a more
philosophical note, that this idea of "Is one person's learning of a shverer
ketzos more valuable than another person's learning of Chumash?" is what
might be described as the communist strand of Jewish thinking - ie, the
lowly factory worker's contribution is just as great, and needs to be
treated as just as great, as that of the factory boss. Indeed the lowly
factory worker's contribution may be greater, as he may have to overcome all
sorts of internal hurdles to work at all (such as not being very smart), and
so they should be paid and treated at least equally.
Similarly the Chumash learning of Yankel Shmerel might be just as valuable
if not more valuable than the chiddushim of [insert your favourite gadol
here], and we dare not value or prioritize in any way the one over the
other.
It is only if you follow this communist strand of thinking that you then end
up with:
>The entire debate only makes sense if one starts with the premise that
Torah learning is useless, that its defensive power
is a fiction conveniently invented by the charedim, whose real motive for
not serving is cowardice and/or treason
That is true if all Torah learning is of equal weight. But if, for example,
the chiddishim of gadol A are understood to have tremendous defensive power,
and the learning of Yankel Shmerele does little, (ie the factory boss
legitimately earns millions, and is fair that the lowly factory worker gets
the minimum wage, as that is commiserate to his contribution to society)
then you would not think twice about drafting Yankel Shmerele, as his
physical contribution in the army might well be a bigger help than any day
he sat in the beis medrish, no matter how hard he tried there, while you
would not dream of drafting a young Ovadiah Yosef (who by 18 was Rav in
Cairo already, and unquestionably fulfilled the Rema's list of requirements
for a talmid chacham), because *his* Torah would pack a hefty defensive
punch.
So, perhaps one could better phrase the debate as - is G-d a communist or a
meritocrat?
--
Zev Sero "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
Regards
Chana
------------------------------
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 75
**************************************
Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
avodah@lists.aishdas.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."